Thomas Madden is chair of the history department at St. Louis University and author of: A Concise History of the Crusades, In October 2004 Zenit, the International News Agency, interviewed him. Madden: The following are some of the most common myths and why they are wrong.

This is a favorite used to demonstrate the evil nature of the Crusades. It is certainly true that many people in Jerusalem were killed after the Crusaders captured the city. But this must be understood in historical context.

I hate it when descriptions of human blood flowing in streets, at some points up to a horse's brisket hitch are taken out of context. With this context stuff Richard could have been called the big pussy cat instead of the Lion Heart.

2
posted on 12/06/2010 7:22:37 AM PST
by kbennkc
(For those who have fought for it freedom has a flavor the protected will never know .F Trp 8th Cav)

That many were killed is not disputed. Rather the context as reinterpreted by modern people. As the author says:

Many were killed, yet many others were ransomed or allowed to go free. By modern standards this may seem brutal. Yet a medieval knight would point out that many more innocent men, women and children are killed in modern bombing warfare than could possibly be put to the sword in one or two days. It is worth noting that in those Muslim cities that surrendered to the Crusaders the people were left unmolested, retained their property and were allowed to worship freely. As for those streets of blood, no historian accepts them as anything other than a literary convention. Jerusalem is a big town. The amount of blood necessary to fill the streets to a continuous and running three-inch depth would require many more people than lived in the region, let alone the city.

4
posted on 12/06/2010 7:57:20 AM PST
by PIF
(They came for me and mine .. now it is your turn..)

I read the article and much time is spent in the defense of the Pope. All of them down through the ages.
Other than that angle, it lumps the remainder of the men into one pot, even tho there were struggles in some european countries against the Pope.
I am sure not every crusader who went to war believed in works for salvation. I am sure many believed in faith in Jesus Christ. This is a very slanted catholic article.

By modern standards this may seem brutal. Yet a medieval knight would point out that many more innocent men, women and children are killed in modern bombing warfare than could possibly be put to the sword in one or two days.

That is your defense for the Rape of Nanking? or do you see a difference between bombing losses, versus putting women and children to the bayonet, and the knife?

Hi Ramone, the way I understand it is that the time frame we are talking about there was no protestant church, printing press and English bible at that time. So it is likely that most did not believe in Justification by faith. Don’cha think?

I like to say the Crusades were a feeble 86 year interruption to over a millennium of Islamic conquests. We are never informed about the brutality of these operations, but instead you would think four Geneva Conventions that were written at the end of WW II were actually found by unearthing an appendix to the Code of Hammurabi.

Penetrating deep into an enemy’s homeland to destroy targets and being forced to do it from the air, which results in collateral damage, is bad enough, but once you arrive there and then to slaughter them by hand, individually, is an entirely different thing.

I know that our GIs will bomb, and use artillery, but I don’t think that they will go in, root out the families from their homes and put them all to the sword, once we have taken the city.

As I understand it, when Jerusalem surrendered, two of the conditions were the payment of 200,000 pieces of gold and the "restoration of the holy cross." When the money wasn't paid, 2,700 captives were slaughtered.

This is from Benedict of Peterborough edited by W Stubbs in 1867 vol ii, p 189, ibn-Shaddad, pp 164-5; all as quoted by Philip K. Hitti in "History of the Arabs" revised 10th edition, page 651 published by palgrave macmillan.

I am sure not every crusader who went to war believed in works for salvation. I am sure many believed in faith in Jesus Christ. This is a very slanted catholic article.

Um, the Crusades took place in the Middle Ages -- the Catholic Church was Christianity in Western Europe, the Eastern Orthodox in Eastern Europe. No one then would have imagined anyone would see a conflict or opposition between works and faith.

Geneva Conventions that were written at the end of WW II were actually found by unearthing an appendix to the Code of Hammurabi.

Geneva Conventions appendix goes back to the Uruk period in Sumeria 5000 BC actually... (There is some indicatrion that the Sumerians plagerized them from the Atlantians). Every one knows that Crusaders were well of the Sumerian Code, appendix, Conventions, Geneva.

26
posted on 12/06/2010 2:36:24 PM PST
by PIF
(They came for me and mine .. now it is your turn..)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.